Should There Be Special Tech Courts?

from the hmmmm... dept

An interesting article in the NY Times wondering whether or not there should be special courts that focus on technology cases. This is in response to the fact that many of today's judges don't have nearly enough background to understand exactly what it is they're deciding about. I'm a little torn on this idea. I can see the benefits - especially in light of a number of stupid court decisions lately. Then again, I'm not sure technology is so special. It should be something that can be explained to the judge so that they can understand it.

Why not?

At first glance, this seems unnecessary -- after all, time very quickly changes what seems to be cutting edge and complex and what isn't. Surely any artificial distinction between tech and non-tech cases would be dated very quickly. However, I think that all they are suggesting is that judges specialize in hearing certain kinds of cases, and that makes perfect sense. Every other profession has specialties, why not the judiciary? You're not going to take an intellectual property case to a divorce lawyer or go to an ObGyn for a fracture.

Difficult...?

This sounds like a good idea, but where do you get people who are 'technically-savvy' but who also would be unbiased? The recording studios might argue that any young dot-com'er turned judge might have something to gain from his own rulings. In the end, all we really need is an intelligent judge and good representation... and a fairly good appeals process. My personal paranoid delusion is that the DeCSS judge was bribed like a made-for-TV-movie's southern law enforcement officer employed to harass tobacco-industry-whistler-blowers...